me by two ladies, with the understanding that I should neither return nor destroy them without the full cognizance and expressed desire of both parties, given in person or writing. That they were to remain in my hands till then, and that nothing or nobody should extort them from me."
"That is easily understood," said I; for she stopped.
"But, now comes word from one of the ladies, the one, too, most interested in the matter, that, for certain reasons, the immediate destruction of those papers is necessary to her peace and safety."
"And do you want to know what your duty is in this case?"
"Yes," she tremulously replied.
I rose. I could not help it: a flood of conjectures rushing in tumult over me.
"It is to hold on to the papers like grim death till released from your guardianship by the combined wish of both parties."
"Is that your opinion as a lawyer?"
"Yes, and as a man. Once pledged in that way, you have no choice. It would be a betrayal of trust to yield to the solicitations of one party what you have undertaken to return to both. The fact that grief or loss might follow your retention of these papers does not release you from your bond. You have nothing to do with that; besides, you are by no means sure that the representations of the so-called interested party are true. You might be doing a greater wrong, by destroying in this way, what is manifestly considered of value to them both, than by preserving the papers intact, according to compact."
"But the circumstances? Circumstances alter cases;
